Pore Occlusion in Compacted Mixtures of Sand and Kaolinite Due to Bioclogging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biokinetics in engineered soils is a subject of relatively recent interest. In this paper, results are presented from experimental studies to address the bioclogging mechanisms. The primary focus of this study is to assess the relative importance of biomass growth vs. biogas generated in the soil pores. Experiments were conducted using Pseudomonas aeruginosa as the bacterial culture and compacted mixtures of kaolinite and Ottawa sand as porous media. Results indicated about one order-of-magnitude reduction of permeabilities when the bacteria were introduced through a nutrient solution in the influent chamber. Compacted specimens prepared using a bacterial inoculum and permeated with nutrient solution alone showed that growth kinetics prevented the specimens from ever reaching the saturated hydraulic conductivities with respect to distilled deionized water. Bacterial counts in the influent and in the effluent revealed that the kinetic processes were similar in soil media and in the pure nutrient solution medium. Reductions in permeabilities were attributed to the biogas generated during bacteria permeation. Pore-size distributions of bioclogged specimens showed lager pores, which was also consistent with visual observations of specimen cracking and gas bubble accumulation at the surface of the specimens, particularly in the case of specimens prepared with bacteria inoculum.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".